Tariff Refund Approaches Amid Pending Supreme Court Ruling

On November 28, 2025, Costco, a major U.S. retail company, filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Customs and Border Protection ("CBP") of the Department of Homeland Security and CBP's commissioner with the U.S. Court of International Trade ("CIT"), seeking an injunction to prevent the CBP from imposing further tariff duties and requesting a full refund of the tariffs that it has already paid.¹ On December 3, 2025, the CIT consolidated Costco's lawsuit with 20 other lawsuits sharing common factual and legal questions.² According to one public source, since November, "nearly 100 businesses have filed lawsuits with the intention of securing funds should the U.S. Supreme Court declare the [P]resident's global tariffs policy illegal."³The Supreme Court has not yet issued its final ruling on the validity of President Trump's tariffs declared under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act ("IEEPA") in Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump, 145 S. Ct. 2811 (2025). Pending the Supreme Court's ruling and as the liquidation date of some import entries approaches, this article summarizes the potential tariff refund mechanisms for affected importers.

Liquidation

Liquidation matters in the tariff regime and further impacts importers' choices of refund mechanisms, as discussed further below. All entries covering imported merchandise shall be liquidated.⁴ Once liquidated, the calculation of import entries becomes final.⁵ The entries that are subject to IEEPA tariffs will be liquidated as early as December 15, 2025.⁶

We note a key concern: do importers risk losing the right to claim refunds on tariffs paid under their liquidated entries if the Supreme Court later invalidates IEEPA tariffs? Such a concern is well-founded based on the CIT's precedent, "the Court of Appeals has consistently refrained from relying on that language in finding the CIT has authority to order reliquidation or refunds in 1581(i) cases and has raised doubts about the CIT's authority to do so."⁷ This uncertainty underscores the importance of proactive planning, importers must evaluate refund strategies now to avoid forfeiting rights if liquidation occurs before the Supreme Court's decision.

Two Refund Mechanisms

At the hearing of Learning Resources, Inc., Justice Barrett cast doubt on the refund processes should the Supreme Court rule in favor of the plaintiffs.⁸ In practice, there are two routes of claiming a tariff refund, administrative or judicial.

Administrative Relief

An importer who chooses to pursue administrative relief can either wait to protest until the import entries are liquidated or immediately request the CBP to extend the liquidation period. An importer's right to protest matures "within 180 days after but not before (A) date of liquidation or reliquidation, or (B) in circumstances where subparagraph (A) is inapplicable, the date of the decision as to which protest is made."⁹

The 180-day post-liquidation temporal prerequisite can prevent affected importers from protesting before their import entries become liquidated. Protesting before liquidation would be premature because the entries are not yet finalized. If the Supreme Court invalidates IEEPA tariffs within the 180-day statutory period, then the ruling can constitute the ground of protesting the liquidated entries. Alternatively, affected importers can act immediately to request the CBP to extend the liquidation period for less than one year but need to show "good cause why the extension should be granted".¹⁰ The decision of extension lies in the CBP's discretion and "[t]he total time for extensions may not exceed 3 years".¹¹

Judicial Relief

Alternatively, an importer who chooses to pursue judicial relief can sue immediately in the CIT to seek injunctive relief to stay the liquidation and preserve the status quo until the Supreme Court's ruling. Suing now can prevent the affected importers from losing their right to refund. This judicial relief route, as we observed, has been adopted by several major retail companies.

The administrative relief can also end up at the CIT if the CBP denies an importer's protest. In such circumstances, the importer can pursue a further review of the denial in the CIT, since the CIT shall "have exclusive jurisdiction of any civil action commenced to contest the denial of a protest, in whole or in part, under section 515 of the Tariff Act of 1930."¹²

Implications for Participants

So far, efforts to secure tariff refunds have involved both administrative and judicial avenues of relief. These efforts carry precedential value to the remaining participants in the entire supply chain, from importing companies to individual customers. For importing companies, we may continue to witness a growing number of companies filing their refund lawsuits. As the CIT will consolidate similar cases, these affected importers can collectively strategize and formulate theories in support of the refund. In the case of individual customers, analyzing potential refund relief becomes more complex because it largely depends on their contractual arrangements with the retailer or wholesaler. Putative class actions or global settlements are also conceivable. We are happy to advise on these issues and to create tailored strategies, whether through administrative protests, judicial actions, or coordinated industry efforts.

Going Forward

Based on the above, we generally advise affected importers to: firstly, track the liquidation date closely. Regardless of limited exceptions, the general liquidation date for import entries is "one year from the date of entry of the merchandise".¹³ The liquidation date is critical for both administrative and judicial relief. On the one hand, the liquidation date triggers the protest at the CBP. On the other hand, if affected importers want to preserve the status quo and suspend the impending liquidation, an injunction must be sought prior to the liquidation date. Secondly, whether to pursue the administrative route or the judicial route, affected importers should engage their advisers as early as possible to assess which is the better route for them. Last but not least, affected importers should closely monitor the Supreme Court's final ruling as it will impact importers' legal, business, and regulatory strategies.

Footnotes

1. Costco Complaint, ¶¶ 1-10.

2. Order on motion to consolidate cases, 1:25-cv-00316-N/A, Docket Entries – Free.Law.

3. Nearly 100 companies are suing the Trump administration over tariffs. Here are some of the biggest names joining the fight – The Oregonian.

4. 19 C.F.R. § 159.2.

5. 19 C.F.R. § 159.1.

6. Costco Complaint, ¶ 7.

7. In re Section 301 Cases, 524 F. Supp. 3d at 1365–66 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2021).

8. "And then if you win, tell me how the reimbursement process would work. Would it be a complete mess?" Oral Arguments / Argument Transcripts – SCOTUS.

9. 19 U.S.C.A. § 1514, subsection (c)(3).

10. 19 C.F.R. § 159.12, subsection (a).

11. Id., subsection (e).

12. 28 U.S.C.A. § 1581, subsection (a).

13. 19 C.F.R. § 159.11, subsection (a).

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.